Sunday, April 23, 2017

3. Currently the world has labelled Malaysia as one of the ten most corrupt country in the world. And there are good reasons for labelling Malaysia corrupt.

4. Najib himself is alleged by the American Department of Justice as being involved in the biggest money laundering activities in the world. Then of course is the loss of billions of Ringgit by 1MDB under Najib. Bankers in Singapore have been jailed and two banks forced to close down for their role in illegal dealings with 1MDB. The Swiss A.G. has failed to get the cooperation of the Malaysian A.G. over illegal dealings involving 1MDB.

5. And now a deputy minister had been caught telling a lie that the Malaysian A.G. had asked for information on 1MDB from the Swiss A.G. which the Swiss promptly denied.

6. Then there is the USD681 million in the PM’s private account which no one in the world believes is a gift from a Saudi prince.

7. The world press is asking why Najib is still the Prime Minister of Malaysia, and no investigation has been made by the police over reports of Najib’s wrongdoings by Bank Negara, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Auditor-General. That these reports have been made official secrets is something that is difficult for the world to accept. Hiding evidence is a crime in any country. But in Malaysia the Government of Najib does this with impunity.

8. The world is aware of the sackings of auditors by 1MDB and that there has been no auditing of 1MDB over the last two years.

9. These facts are known to the world. Malaysians will know more. They know that the Malaysian Government is highly indebted, is in deficit, is unable to meet budget allocations. They know of the high level of corruption in the Government. They laugh at the orchestrated shows of support for the Prime Minister. And they know of the huge sums of money received by BN members of Parliament to ensure their loyalty.

10. They know of the depreciation of the Ringgit, the high cost of living and the fall in their living standards.

11. The controlled media may make glowing reports about Malaysia’s economy but the world knows that Malaysians are suffering in terms of the economy, are living in fear of harassment by Government agencies, of high levels of unemployment.

12. In this world of easy communications and the Internet, what Malaysians know will also be known to the rest of the world. Hence the question asked of Malaysians when abroad. Where before there was admiration for Malaysia’s achievement, now foreigners ask Malaysians, “What is happening to your country?” Clearly they know that things are going wrong in Malaysia.

13. But Najib seems to demand that the world respect Malaysia. What is there for the world to respect about Malaysia.

14. Can they respect Malaysia because BN has the means to realise its promises to Malaysians. So far the BN record is the worst registered in terms of economic achievements, democracy and the rule of law, freedom of the media and free speech, open debates and quality of life. And the history of wrong doings by Najib as listed above cannot be unknown to the world.

15. In fact Malaysians abroad often hide their Malaysian identity for fear of being told about the corruption and the allegations of wrongdoings by their Prime Minister.

16. Najib should stop making ridiculous demands that the world should respect Malaysia. But if this is what he wants, then allow the courts to hear charges of wrongdoings by him and lift the ban on the reports by Bank Negara, MACC and the Auditor General.

17. Better still, he should resign and let Malaysia be democratic again. A kleptocracy, a Malaysia ruled by crooks and criminal as alleged by numerous foreigners and their institutions will never gain the respect of the world.

1. It is amusing to read about Dato’ Sri Najib urging Malaysians to have high cultural and moral values. Even more amusing is his demand for the world to respect his Malaysia.

2. But then Najib does not believe in leadership by example. He apparently believes in doing what “I tell you to do and not what I do”.

3. But whether he believes in leadership by example or not his followers cannot help but look up to him as their model. Accordingly his UMNO followers have become as corrupt and immoral as him.

4. How on earth does he expect that in 33 years time, through his 2050 Transformation Slogan, Malaysian would posses high moral values and culture?

5. Najib is not an example of a person of high moral values. In the first place he believes that cash is king. This simply means that people can be corrupted to make them do anything; to vote for BN in the next election for example. As a result Malaysia has been classified as one of the then most corrupt countries in the world. Do people respect a highly corrupt country.

6. And the money for corruption will come largely from stolen 1MDB money. Incidentally there seems to have been no audit of 1MDB money over the last two years. Is this something which will make the world respect us.

7. Now we hear reports of senior civil servants having hundreds of millions of Ringgit which had obviously been acquired corruptly. Far from achieving higher moral values, it seems the values have deteriorated under Najib. Morality and culture are going from bad to worse. Merely introducing a new slogan about Transformation in 33 years is not going to spin Malaysians around to possess high cultural and moral values.

8. Actually Najib’s call to Malaysians to achieve high moral values and culture and for the world to respect Malaysia is ludicrous. Currently Malaysia’s name is mud to the world. Malaysians are ashamed to admit they are Malaysians when abroad. Such as the reputation of Malaysia caused by Najib’s 1MDB losing billions of Ringgit, money laundering and the billions found in his banking account.

9. Worse still is the fact that he is still the Prime Minister of Malaysia. In Brazil and South Korea, mere suspicion of corruption has resulted in suspension and arrest. But in Malaysia Najib is safe and is brazenly telling Malaysians to be honest, and demanding the world to respect this corrupt country.

1. Money is no longer in the form of coins and currency notes. Today money may be in the form of cheques, credit cards, entries in the account books of banks, telegraphic transfers, even bit coins.

2. But whatever form that money takes, except for small amounts, all others must be recorded in writing or some form of permanent records.

3. Money in the banks may be in the form of coins, currency notes or gold. But in whatever form the value they represent must be as stated in account books. Much of the money dealt in banking transactions do not exist except in the account books of their banks. Banks may therefore lend money which they don’t have. This is necessary because there cannot be enough coins or currency notes minted for the needs of business.

4. We hear much these days of huge sums of money being owned by the rich. Actually they do not have the money in cash i.e. coins and currency notes. They only have entries in the bank books indicating the money they have with the banks.

5. If they want to use their money for payment of goods or services, they merely issue cheques to the amount.

6. Today they may use a credit card which would be accepted by the seller of goods or service, which the seller can claim from the bank. Usually the claim involves a transfer from the account of the buyer to the account of the seller in the bank.

7. If the seller needs to use the money in his accounts, he merely issues a cheque or he uses his credit card.

8. No cash in the form of coins and currency notes are involved at anytime.

9. When a large sum of money is paid to a person for whatever reason, the money could be in the form of a cheque. The cheque has to be deposited in a bank where the sum is credited to the account of the receipient. The cheque is retained by the bank but the stub is retained by the depositor. Of course the depositor can also maintain a book recording the payments made to the bank, or the receipt of money from the bank. In addition the cheques can hold record of the transaction.

10. If for example USD681 million is donated to a person, then this amount will be in the record of the donor’s bank in the first place. There will be records in the bank of the money deposited with it. These records will have details of the source of money, the form of money and a lot of other details.

11. When the money is given to a receipient, the source bank will have records of the acts involved in instructing the bank, the form of transfer, receipts by the receipient or the receipient’s bank charges etc.

12. The receipient bank will credit the amount in the account of the receipient with details of the donor’s bank.

13. If subsequently the receipient spends the money, for whatever purpose, it will be recorded by the bank (debited), recorded in the cheques issued and if the cheque is cashed, the cash paid out as cash or cheques or transfer to the account of the creditor would all be recorded.

14. Clearly an investigator can follow the records of the movements of the USD681 million including the return of USD620 million to the generous Saudi Prince.

15. Banking secrecy should not be in the way of an investigation by Government authorities investigating criminal acts.

16. The mere letter of admission by the generous donor is not enough. Neither can the decision of the Attorney General that there has been no wrongdoings be accepted without all the records aforementioned.

17. Even swearing on the Quran is not acceptable as we cannot tell how strong is the faith of the swearer.

18. So, what can be believed is that the USD681 million or RM2.6 billion in the account of the Prime Minister is 1MDB money. And unless it can be proven otherwise the money must have been stolen. The person stealing money must be classified as a thief whether he is punished or not.

Thursday, April 13, 2017

1. 1MDB is about money. It was set up as “Sovereign Wealth Fund”. But it is not. It is not because the 42 billion Ringgit was borrowed. And borrowed money cannot be regarded as wealth.

2. Money today takes many form. Originally it came as coins made of precious metal. It later is represented as currency notes, then as cheques, credit cards, debit cards and now as pin numbers.

3. Whatever form that money takes, it cannot be moved without some written records. These records may be as receipts for payment, bills, cheques and cheque stubs, entries in account books of traders and banks, records of electronic transfers etc.

4. The names of the owners or recipient must be in these records, especially when large transactions are involved.

5. If it is claimed that some generous Arab had given the USD 681 million, there must be plenty of records. The donor must have records of the money deposited in his bank, from which he must have given the money. He cannot have that amount of money as cash in his house. His donation must have been recorded in the bank or banks.

6. The bank will have the name of the owner, when he received the money, from whom, to whom, in current account, or fix-deposit, in one lump sum or in drip and drab, currencies used, deposited as cash or cheques or electronic transfer etc.

7. And when the money is donated to the lucky recipient, what form did it take; as cash or cheques or electronic transfer, from whom to whom, account number, entries in books, the bank where the money is held, the cheques or cash drawn and transferred, the electronic transfer, the recipient banks, the records in the recipient banks’ books, the cheques drawn on the bank, payment made, to whom, statement in bank account etc etc.

8. Clearly money, especially large sums of money cannot be moved within a country or across borders without a whole series of reports or notes being made in banks and cheques and the account books as to who paid the recipient for goods or services etc etc.

9. Merely declaring that the money is a donation for whatever purpose or a letter from the alleged donor is not enough. A declaration by the A.G. that there was nothing wrong with the transaction is also not enough.

10. Let us see all the records and the documents including the business of the ultra rich donor who had donated easily the biggest sum of money in the history of human charity. Let us see the cheques drawn or the money in the Arab Malaysian Bank.

11. Let an independent body have sight of all the documents and swear as to the truth of their findings.

12. Until then we can only accept the report of the Department of Justice of America as God given truth, that 1MDB money has been stolen by the people responsible for its management, i.e. by the Chairman of the Advisory Board of 1MDB, that Jho Low still has most of the billions and that the money can be used to bribe, particularly in the PRU 14.

13. I wonder who advised the all-powerful Attorney General not to talk to the press, not to explain “No Further Action (NFA)” does not mean no further action but means further action can be taken. Is his “consent to Bank Negara” to issue a letter of administrative compound to 1MDB not a consent but is a denial of agreement to what Bank Negara was legally required to do.

14. Or is “no wrongdoing” an admission that there was wrongdoing by Najib.

Since the debate had been disallowed, I believe Malaysians missed the opportunity to hear Nazri Aziz explaining some of the burning questions I would have asked. These questions are based on known facts and are not wild accusations or speculations.

1. For example the Malaysian Attorney General declared that Najib was not guilty of any wrongdoings.

2. Accordingly all the reports by Bank Negara, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Auditor General which were the bases for indicting Najib, were dismissed by him. But they were also put under the Malaysian Official Secrets Act, which means nobody can quote from them even if they had read them.

5. Also reported by the Straits Times of Singapore is Sturzenegger’s ties with Jho Low (Low Taek Jho) a close friend of Najib, “accused around the world of being at the centre of alleged massive money laundering linked to 1MDB”.

6. Clearly Singapore finds a lot of things wrong with 1MDB funds and management. But Malaysia’s famous Attorney General declares there is nothing wrong in the operation of 1MDB money. He does not see any need for continued investigations.

7. It cannot be that 1MDB money flew on its own to Singapore into the hands of the four crooks named. Somebody in Malaysia who managed 1MDB must have sent the money to Singapore. Somebody from 1MDB must have had dealings with the crooked Singapore bankers and the banks involved. Somebody in 1MDB’s management must know about the systematic siphoning of 1MDB money, or abuses of the authority to handle it.

8. But the A.G., the Malaysian police and 1MDB executives are not interested. The whereabouts of the 1MDB money and the siphoning of a substantial amount of it by various people seems to be of no concern to Malaysian authorities. That billions of Ringgit of 1MDB money have been lost is also of no concern to Malaysian authorities, the 1MDB managers and Najib as the sole authority on 1MDB money and as Prime Minister of the country.

9. When the BMF money was lost way back in 1981 the Government set up a committee of three, headed by Tan Sri Ahmad Nordin, the Auditor General then, to investigate the management of BMF and the losses, although the money lost was not Government money. A white paper was issued and parliament debated the matter openly. The report was not placed under the Official Secrets Act.

10. Civil suits against BMF officials were initiated by the Government and extradition began to bring back Lorrain Osman.

11. The amount lost by BMF was about USD47.5 million (RM118.75 million at the exchange rate in 1980s), a piddling sum compared to the RM42 billion (42 thousand millions) involved in 1MDB scandal. Yet the Government of that time initiated action against the culprits. In the end Lorrain was jailed and others who were implicated punished or fled the country.

12. In the case of 1MDB and the loss of billions as well as the continued need to pay billions for loans raised by 1MDB, the Attorney General merely said nothing wrong was done and no more investigation needed to be made.

13. This decision by Tan Sri Dato Apandi b. Hj. Ali, the Attorney General clearly seem to be a cover-up of Najib’s involvement in the losses, the obvious possibility that the DOJ’s allegation that the RM2.6 billion ($681 million) in his bank account came from 1MDB is true.

14. Najib’s approval must be obtained for all money transactions by 1MDB, according to article 117 in 1MDB’s Articles of Association. Any loss of money by 1MDB must therefore be placed squarely on Najib’s shoulders.

15. On 3rd June 2015 Bank Negara issued a statement which include the legal provision under which the bank would trigger formal investigations. The provisions are:

i. When monies for which approvals are given are not used for the purpose indicated in the submission;

ii. When incorrect or false information are provided in the submission;

iii. Failure to comply with the conditions in the approval.

16. If any or all of these rules and regulations are breached then Bank Negara would revoke the approval.

17. The statement went on to say “with respect to 1MDB, a formal inquiry has commenced to examine any contravention of the Central Bank’s rules and legislation……”.

18. It seems that Bank Negara did carry out an inquiry on 1MDB for on 28th April 2016, the bank issued the following statement:

“Following receipt of the consent of the Attorney General today, Bank Negara Malaysia has issued a letter of administrative compound to 1MDB for failure to comply with directions issued under the Financial Services Act, 2013. This includes requirement for 1MDB to repatriate monies remitted abroad following the revocations of the three permissions granted by Bank Negara Malaysia to 1MDB in 2009, 2010 and 2011. 1MDB has also failed to submit evidence and documentation specified by the Bank to justify its liability to fully comply with the repatriation order. 1MDB has been given until 30 May 2016 to pay the compound. The payment of the compound marks the conclusion of the investigation by Bank Negara Malaysia on the contraventions to the rules and regulations of the Central Bank.”

19. Conclusion of investigation does not mean no action should be taken based on the results of the investigation.

20. In a news report on 25 May 2016 “1MDB confirms that it has today made payment in full, of the compound, in compliance with the decision of BNM”.

21. This payment of the compound means that 1MDB does not dispute the correctness of the accusations made by Bank Negara that it is guilty of wrongdoings with regard to the approval of Bank Negara for USD1.83 billion for debt management and restructuring exercises overseas.

22. Since the Attorney General had given his consent to the action taken by Bank Negara, he himself has clearly admitted that 1MDB was involved in wrongdoings with regard to the approval of Bank Negara.

23. The wrongdoings of 1MDB must be shouldered by Dato Sri Najib because they cannot be done without his approval (article 117 of 1MDB Articles of Association).

24. How then can the A.G. declare that Najib has committed no wrongdoings when he himself had given his consent to Bank Negara to issue a letter of administrative compound (fine).

25. According to the law the A.G.’s decision is final. In the courts, appeals are allowed. But alone in this country the A.G. holds indisputable authority. But the fact remains that his decision is contrary to his earlier decision to give Bank Negara consent to compound (fine) 1MDB.

1. I welcome Najib’s statement that 1MDB has cleared all its bank debts and short term debts.

2. Since 1MDB is not doing any business, the payment cannot be from profits. It must be from the RM10.97 billion sale of Edra Global Energy Bhd’s asset, Syarikat Bandar Malaysia Sdn Bhd (Sungai Besi Airport) equity and the Tun Razak Exchange Land.

3. The payments listed adds up to RM3.9 billion. So 1MDB is left with RM7.07 billion.

4. But the total debt incurred by 1MDB is RM50 billion as of January 2016.

5. Bank Negara has instructed 1MDB to bring back all the money that was invested not according to the approval given by the bank upon presentation made by 1MDB.

6. 1MDB issued a statement on 28th April 2016 that it respects authority and decision of BNM.

7. On May 25, 2016 1MDB announced that it has made full payment of a fine imposed by BNM.

8. No mention is made of the amount of the fine.

9. No mention is also made about bringing back all the money that had been “invested” abroad.

10. It would be interesting to know whether 1MDB has other assets to sell to pay the balance of the RM50 billion debts amounting to RM40 billion. If there are no more assets, how does 1MDB propose to raise this RM40 billion.

11. What is the rate of interest on this balance? Unless the interest is paid the RM40 billion would increase considerably. Is 1MDB paying the interest, if not on the principal.

12. If there are no more assets, where is the RM40 billion. It is a large sum of money. It must be somewhere. Has the money been invested. If so in what. Or has it been frozen. If so who has frozen the money and why. Is 1MDB entitled to claim the frozen money? Has 1MDB brought back all the unfrozen money invested not in accordance with the approval of BNM as required. If not where is the money.

13. The statement by Najib in answer to Er Teck Hwa (DAP – Bakri) raises more questions than answers.

14. Perhaps the Prime Minister can explain. It is the people’s money. They are entitled to know as in the end they will have to pay, one way or another.